Bearden v. State ( 1934 )

Broyles, C. J.

The defendant was convicted of possessing whisky, and his motion for a new trial embraced only the usual general grounds. While the evidence was conflicting and would have authorized the acquittal of the accused, it also authorized the finding of the jury; and the refusal to grant a new trial was not error.

Judgment affirmed.

MacIntyre and Gfuerry, JJ., concur.